Drugwash wrote: ↑
an attempt at anonymizing the requests by always having the site as the requester, thus protecting users' privacy to some degree.
Just for the record, while you can effectively gather statistics of requests by using a shortening service, it's very difficult if not impossible to track anyone through it. Tracking requires unique identifiers; a short URL by design doesn't have any unless it's unique to each visitor, which is not the way shortening services work. Of course you can play devil's advocate and complain that it's technically
possible for the shortener to gather some minimal data on the visit (like IP/geo and other public information a browser sends with requests), but that would still happen in that case if the request was "funnelled" through an extension author's server. With the added risk of course that the shortening service can easily blacklist the extension server for being abusive, effectively killing its function.
I personally think the risk of sending all your unshortening requests through one unnecessary step has a much higher risk of being compromised than having a client-side request being done to the shortening service; a request that would happen anyway
if you want to know the original URL before going there. After all, you'd be sending all short URLs to one location, centralizing it more and being able to correlate your requests across multiple unrelated sites using different shortening services. So from a privacy point of view, IMHO you certainly lose more than you gain.
Sorry for going on at length here. I know you're done with this thread, I just felt it'd be at least somewhat informative to add my opinion coming from a tech perspective.